Back

Agonistic anti-CD40 converts Tregs into Type 1 effectors within the tumor micro-environment

Maltez, V.; Arora, C.; Sor, R.; Lian, Q.; Vonderheide, R. H.; Germain, R. N.; Byrne, K. T.

2022-10-20 immunology
10.1101/2022.10.17.512537 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Multiple cell types, molecules, and processes contribute to inhibition of anti-tumor effector responses, often frustrating effective immunotherapy. Among these, Foxp3+ CD4+ cells (Tregs) are well-recognized to play an immunosuppressive role in the tumor microenvironment. The first clinically successful checkpoint inhibitor, anti-CTLA-4 antibody, may deplete Tregs at least in part by antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC), but this effect is unreliable in mice, including in a genetically engineered mouse model of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). In contrast, agonistic CD40 antibody, which serves as an effective therapy, is associated with notable Treg disappearance in the PDAC model. The mechanism of CD40-mediated Treg loss is poorly understood, as Tregs are CD40-negative. Here we have explored the mechanistic basis for the loss of Foxp3 T cells upon anti-CD40 treatment and find, using tissue-level multiplex immunostaining and orthogonal dissociated cell analyses, that Tregs are not depleted but converted into interferon-{gamma} (IFN-{gamma}) producing, Type I CD4+ T effector cells. This process depends on IL-12 and IFN-{gamma} signaling evoked by action of the anti-CD40 antibody on dendritic cells (DCs), especially BATF3-dependent cDC1s. These findings provide insight into a previously unappreciated mechanism of CD40 agonism as a potent anti-tumor intervention that promotes the re-programming of Tregs into tumor-reactive CD4+ effector T cells, markedly augmenting the anti-tumor response.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.